xm8 no more?

www.defensereview.com...

its hard to believe but it seems the xm8 is in trouble most of it is unconfirmed though i wondered if anyone else knew anything about it

[edit on 7-6-2005 by usmc42]

It's what I've been saying all along. Folks have been all ga-ga over this rifle, simply because it is an H&K.

Its RPM is no faster than the M16 series.
Its accuracy is no better than the M16 series.
Its longevity is no better than the M16 series.
It will configure into various systems no more easily than the M16 series.
It's reliability is no better than the M16...which is actually quite good, despite the story's to the contrary.

.....it's ugly as sin too!

Army, I have to disagree.

RPM isn't an important factor simply because any rifles that fire at 600~700rpm is fine, the M8 fires at 750rpm is I rememeber correctly, the M16A2 fires at 850rpm in 3 round burst.
Accuracy on the M8 was reported to be much better, and since it's smaller than the M16, that's quite impressive.
It's durability is alot higher, it's barrel lasts longer than the A2.
It actually converts better to more specialized rifles but doesn't support all the fancy add-on gadgets for the AR-15/M16 family
It's reliability is MUCH higher since it uses a short-stroke gas system, AK-47 style.

I don't considder it to be ugly, the black version makes it look good, but that's personal taste and an inrelavant point, it seems negative reviews are due to not anyone likes the way it looks, it's based on the G36, one of the best assault rifles ever made.

It's only bad point is it has 5.56mm rounds rather then a more powerful round, but in most cases, shot placement is more important than the stopping power.

I think the XM8 is not going anywhere, people will get used to the looks of it just like with the M16 back in the day, i'm sure it will have some bumps in the road before the M8A1 is fielded just like the M16, but probably nothing as severe as the M16.

Judging this rifle on it's looks is just plain chidish IMO.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't the recoil on the xm8 pretty light too? I don't know how relevant that is or how it compares to other rifles, but the clip I saw of it had a guy firing maybe 10-20 rounds full-auto, one handed, and able to keep it in pretty much the same place. It didn't show how accurate he was, but the gun didn't hardly move. Just wanting to make sure I'm thinking of the same gun at least...

i would rather have the barrette 6.8mm m468

About the 5.56mm caliber supposed to be too low:

H&K Engineers have planned (and built up) a convertion kit to change the M8A1 barrel into a 7.62mm tube, making the XM able to fire AK like ammo.
This kit will be handled to special forces gunneries to change the XM-S (short) version of this kid into a more powerful weapon able to pick the ennemy bogeys clips and use them, so no need to carry 26 clips on the field. Change can be made in less than 30 minutes.

About the Barret convertion system: it reposes on the M16 skeleton. Therefore, the structurals flaws of the M16 on its back part will be reported on the barret.

Out.

Anything is better than the M-16. I remember mine would jam all the damn time and it was hard to shoot expert with it.

I'd take an M-14 over an M-16, XM-8, XM-29 or another weapon being produced today.

The M-14 was the best service rifle the US has ever employed, period.

US Army annouced last month they are going to re-compete the OICW for M-16 replace (having decided to drop the XM-29 in favour of XM-8 and XM-25)

See US Army decides to compete OICW

I has thought with the recent praise for the XM-25 that they have decided against a combined weapon (rifle/grenade launcher)

hte xm-25 looks more like a toy than the xm8 does

I'm hope the US Army either chooses the XM-8 or the FN SCAR.

Hell, as long as they replace that AR-15, no stoner rifle can compete with the Kalashnikov style action in reliability.

Its sad that the US has the best battle rifle ever made, the M-14, but refuses to use it.

Defense contractors have way too much influence nowadays

Originally posted by KyleChemist
Its sad that the US has the best battle rifle ever made, the M-14, but refuses to use it.

Defense contractors have way too much influence nowadays

the m14 is just too long and heavy for todays whimpy soldiers they ant eveything lighter and smaller and faster

the m14 also shoots an obsolite round sure you should have a one shot kill but you dont need that much fire power to get it i would go with the 6.8mm


[edit on 10-6-2005 by usmc42]

The Marine Corps and the Army still uses the M-14 in some roles.

The M14 has savage recoil, it's heavy, very accurate and very deadly though, it uses 7.62x51mm ammo which is still widely used in medium machineguns and sniper rifles.

It's a good weapon, but not as an infantry weapon.

ok I own a M-4A3 and i love it there is no reason 4 a XM-8. It is a waste of money 4 it. The m4's and m16's have been war proven many times they r great rifles. NO NEED 4 A NEW GUN!!!!

Originally posted by PRIVATE PAIN
ok I own a M-4A3 and i love it there is no reason 4 a XM-8. It is a waste of money 4 it. The m4's and m16's have been war proven many times they r great rifles. NO NEED 4 A NEW GUN!!!!

There will always be a need for a better rifle, no matter what age it is.

Exactly, that's the point, M-16 has been Battle Proven, as in, it's been used in battle, the XM-8 project isn't complete yet, so they won't throw it into battle.

People thought that the M-16 wouldn't work when it first came out, look at it now. We will only know until the XM-8 actually sees service.

Shattered OUT...

........is that piss in that bottle?